Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
143 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So why did SoS Clinton have a system set up outside (Original Post) mmonk Mar 2016 OP
Well, she didn't do it to compromise our security. That's what matters. Hoyt Mar 2016 #1
I know a guy who didn't drive drunk to hurt someone tk2kewl Mar 2016 #12
Except Clinton didn't hurt anyone. I get the email deal is your last desperate hope Hoyt Mar 2016 #21
So by your logic drunk driving is ok as long as no one gets hurt tk2kewl Mar 2016 #26
Look man, I'm tired of this junk with you guys. I'm not talking about friggin drunk drivers, Hoyt Mar 2016 #54
Just sad. libtodeath Mar 2016 #67
the laws are for little people, I guess tk2kewl Mar 2016 #71
To those of us who work in cyber security, this is NOT "trumped up crud." Fawke Em Mar 2016 #77
The biggest problem facing the country today is more people believe it's nothing cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #83
Maybe you are a bit biased because of the source of your income. If classified Hoyt Mar 2016 #100
you are sadly using old talking points and not up to speed. grasswire Mar 2016 #104
Like you aren't using "talking points." Even your candidate says the email deal is BS. Hoyt Mar 2016 #117
Here is a news flash fer ya nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #119
Nadin, it's only serious in Sanders' and Trumps' supporters minds. Glad to know you are more astute Hoyt Mar 2016 #122
You ignore the FBI and the IGs... at your peril nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #124
Sounds like you have been reading too much Judge Napolitano. Hoyt Mar 2016 #132
Nope sounds like I have been reading nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #137
no, he didn't grasswire Mar 2016 #127
Anything to terminate Hillary's campaign Dem2 Mar 2016 #99
Some of us are talking of nothing serious nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #110
Thanks nadin. 840high Mar 2016 #113
"Suspicions" -- LMAO, from whom? Even Sanders said the email issue is BS. Saw him right there on TV Hoyt Mar 2016 #120
the idiots at NSA, and at least a couple of the the Inspector Generals nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #121
We'll know soon enough. Of course, when she is not indicted or anything else, you will rack it up Hoyt Mar 2016 #123
Given they extended this from December, when it was supposed to be done nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #126
LOL :) insta8er Mar 2016 #125
Sanders will continue to chip away at Hillary's shaky support, regardless of the damned e-mails. reformist2 Mar 2016 #49
That was the first thing that came to my mind as well... cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #23
You know this how? libtodeath Mar 2016 #66
You think she's a spy for Russia, ISIS or something? You guys crack me up. Hoyt Mar 2016 #118
Like buying a golden bathtub. To flaunt her power and wealth. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #2
^THIS^ is the truth, right here. cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #24
Maybe she's a Russian spy. JoePhilly Mar 2016 #3
I know you are kidding nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #111
To keep the All-Powerful DU too busy arguing among ourselves to avoid the oncoming Fascist takeover. randome Mar 2016 #4
She learned sneaky cleverness treestar Mar 2016 #116
Didin't want anyone watching the deals she was Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #5
Good question. mmonk Mar 2016 #7
I vote for this Hydra Mar 2016 #11
If so, it backfired spectacularly becoming a story on its own karynnj Mar 2016 #19
The Clintons practically live the mantra of "It seemed like a good idea at the time..." Hydra Mar 2016 #33
That sounds plausible. Gregorian Mar 2016 #17
plus communicating with blumenthal noiretextatique Mar 2016 #18
+10 million! So obvious along with her pay to play going on with the Foundation nt riderinthestorm Mar 2016 #43
.+1 840high Mar 2016 #114
+1 nt snappyturtle Mar 2016 #30
This seems the most likely to me, based on what we've seen so far. nt vintx Mar 2016 #41
There it is, right there! HassleCat Mar 2016 #61
That doesn't make sense gwheezie Mar 2016 #82
ay.. yup!! n/t dana_b Mar 2016 #88
Probably a lot bigger than that. JackRiddler Mar 2016 #109
Excellent answer. 840high Mar 2016 #115
^^^This^^^ eom farleftlib Mar 2016 #140
To avoid FOIL requests UglyGreed Mar 2016 #6
It is good for that. mmonk Mar 2016 #8
Probably on the advice of Kissenger tk2kewl Mar 2016 #13
FOIA Requests, and yes, I agree that this was the main reason. Dustlawyer Mar 2016 #51
I'm sorry in NYS UglyGreed Mar 2016 #68
This message was self-deleted by its author PonyUp Mar 2016 #9
This is becoming more and more obvious NWCorona Mar 2016 #34
Seems to me that replies 5, 6 and 9 aren't mutually exclusive HereSince1628 Mar 2016 #37
+1,000,000 eom dragonfly301 Mar 2016 #53
Maybe speaktruthtopower Mar 2016 #10
Just as Bill answered in 2004 about Lewinsky when he did book tours, "because she could" karynnj Mar 2016 #14
A tough situation. mmonk Mar 2016 #28
Why are Democrats propagating a Republican invented scandal against a Democrat? GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #15
is the FBI a republican group? noiretextatique Mar 2016 #20
The origin of the email controversy is the Republicans in the House of Representatives GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #29
No, the origin of the controversy is HIllary Clinton... Human101948 Mar 2016 #36
And the origin of discovering the stained blue dress was Hillary's desire to withhold information. frylock Mar 2016 #63
Look! Over there - Its a red herring. GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #73
If Hillary had just compliied with the request for those law firm papers.. frylock Mar 2016 #74
Yea, the dress was a hit job on Bill Clinton GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #76
So did the VRWC use mind control to get Bill to not have sexual relations with that woman? frylock Mar 2016 #78
Let's see GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #79
The common denominator is Hillary and her inability to comply with simple requests. frylock Mar 2016 #87
The FBI isn't investigating Clinton they're investigating the SoS serverS, this is so beneeth folk uponit7771 Mar 2016 #138
I asked a question based on the fact of the system created. mmonk Mar 2016 #31
And yet you still fall for it. baldguy Mar 2016 #42
Fall for reality? It does exist. Are you saying it doesn't? mmonk Mar 2016 #50
RW propaganda is not reality. baldguy Mar 2016 #60
They did not create another server system. mmonk Mar 2016 #62
Yes, they did use private emails. baldguy Mar 2016 #65
Whooossshhh.. Fawke Em Mar 2016 #80
"Whooossshhh" indeed. baldguy Mar 2016 #134
I didn't ask about emails. mmonk Mar 2016 #135
You're promoting a RW agenda insisting that Clinton conform to a standard of conduct baldguy Mar 2016 #139
Serious? They've applied to everyone involved. mmonk Mar 2016 #141
Where are the transcripts of Powell being grilled by a Congressional committee for 11 hours? baldguy Mar 2016 #143
I have to agree. One of the 99 Mar 2016 #45
Nope. Republican witch hunts may have poisoned the well... RufusTFirefly Mar 2016 #84
So Sad that you're believing GOP propaganda. One of the 99 Mar 2016 #142
One can only wonder why so many DUers uncritically support corporatist Broward Mar 2016 #58
So Bill could look over her shoulder? Gregorian Mar 2016 #16
So no incriminating public records are left. Fuddnik Mar 2016 #22
the nightmare scenario AgerolanAmerican Mar 2016 #103
Initially, because the NSA said she could not have a secure Blackberry like POTUS KeepItReal Mar 2016 #25
Convenience and control. DCBob Mar 2016 #27
You would allow hackers to get into your private server and view national secrets? Fawke Em Mar 2016 #81
In case you were not aware, there are ways to block hackers. DCBob Mar 2016 #96
We don't know that for sure. 840high Mar 2016 #128
Well then, that settles it. LOL libdem4life Mar 2016 #86
Actually, the FBI report will settle it. DCBob Mar 2016 #94
Thanks for that bit of info...we agree...the FBI will settle it. libdem4life Mar 2016 #98
Any IT professional knows that a system can be hacked and log entries wouldn't show it. nt DemocracyDirect Mar 2016 #131
She could always have a Blackberry. Rice had a blackberry. She was always allowed Recursion Mar 2016 #32
Did you ever move from one job to another that meant you needed to change your technology? karynnj Mar 2016 #44
Because our government was/is unprepared for the digital revolution. Trust Buster Mar 2016 #35
However, shouldn't her response have been to demand more changes in the SD system? karynnj Mar 2016 #46
The email bullshit is nothing but political. It's RW propaganda designed solely to attack a Democrat baldguy Mar 2016 #47
There is saying that includes a sex act and a chicken... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #59
You really think 2 judges, FBI are rw? 840high Mar 2016 #129
"Our government servers get hacked on a regular basis." Fawke Em Mar 2016 #85
Hillary was the most traveled Secretary of State in U.S. history. Trust Buster Mar 2016 #91
Because when you are preparing for a global crime spree FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #38
^^^ LOL! True. RiverLover Mar 2016 #108
Apparently, the road to the Presidency is paved with "He/She did it first!" cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #39
This message was self-deleted by its author PonyUp Mar 2016 #52
Death throes of a dying campaign. nt LexVegas Mar 2016 #40
Libya. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #48
Possibly.... peace13 Mar 2016 #55
They are light. mmonk Mar 2016 #101
The server was set up so that FoIA requests would return the answer, 'We have no records'. w4rma Mar 2016 #56
FOIA requests is why I believe she set up an outside system. Autumn Mar 2016 #57
Yes, I believe that to be a reason. mmonk Mar 2016 #64
Because she and people like her, thin they are above the rules that apply to everyone else. pdsimdars Mar 2016 #69
It was a deliberate effort to frustrate the Freedom of Information Act. Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #70
I can answer this. It was to be able to make business deals with and for wealthy private interests Zorra Mar 2016 #72
concise and pertinent. grasswire Mar 2016 #105
Because 9/11 FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #75
Paganini was not offered immunity for a day in the park. He was her IT guy. libdem4life Mar 2016 #89
yep nt grasswire Mar 2016 #106
because govt procurement is BACKWARD. slow, low power. pansypoo53219 Mar 2016 #90
Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2016 #92
CONTROL. jalan48 Mar 2016 #93
Not quite unplaced paranoia with the RW nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #95
Yep. mmonk Mar 2016 #102
hey, the wealth of the world is at stake here grasswire Mar 2016 #107
I am not willing to go down that road nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #112
History will not be kind to the Clintons tough. DemocracyDirect Mar 2016 #133
History will not be kind nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #136
Yes. 840high Mar 2016 #130
Delete, deflect, plausible deniability. OZi Mar 2016 #97
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
21. Except Clinton didn't hurt anyone. I get the email deal is your last desperate hope
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:23 AM
Mar 2016

Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:15 PM - Edit history (1)

for Sanders.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
54. Look man, I'm tired of this junk with you guys. I'm not talking about friggin drunk drivers,
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:14 PM
Mar 2016

I'm posting about the friggin email deal that is a bunch of trumped up crud, and you ought to know it.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
77. To those of us who work in cyber security, this is NOT "trumped up crud."
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:58 PM
Mar 2016

I earn my living trying to explain to others why following security protocols is necessary.

The security analysts I work with all say - no matter their political leanings - that if they had done what she's accused of doing, they would have already been in jail.

That the FBI is investigating and the NSA is now leaking about it and that her server guy has been given immunity all point to the fact that it's really NOT "trumped up crud."

But you keep your head in the sand.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
83. The biggest problem facing the country today is more people believe it's nothing
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:16 PM
Mar 2016

than understand it's a security risk the likes of which we've rarely seen.

The evidence is in the fact none of the sycophants will touch posts like yours.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
100. Maybe you are a bit biased because of the source of your income. If classified
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:47 PM
Mar 2016

information was not involved, as appears to be the case, and if nothing of that nature was compromised, it's trumped up crud. Sorry.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
104. you are sadly using old talking points and not up to speed.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:14 PM
Mar 2016

No one is going to take you seriously.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
119. Here is a news flash fer ya
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:06 PM
Mar 2016

I suspect Sanders, like you and most Americans do not understand the seriousness of this issue.

It took sitting down with people who once held clearances and reading emails, to realize just how serious this was, This is about country, not party. Oh and I understand why she shot herself on the foot, but this time she shot herself on the foot, metaphorically speaking of course.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
122. Nadin, it's only serious in Sanders' and Trumps' supporters minds. Glad to know you are more astute
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:12 PM
Mar 2016

than "most Americans." A lot of Sanders' (and Trumps') supporters seem to have that belief.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
124. You ignore the FBI and the IGs... at your peril
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:16 PM
Mar 2016

As far as I am concerned the entertainment will come when you have to admit that maybe you were wrong. To be correct, I do not expect you to ever do so. But if there even the smell of an indictment or Comney goes to the press because argle bargle, party loyalties, and we begin Watergate II, you know what? I will stock up on popcorn. I could give two shits what happens to the Democratic (or republican) party at this point. I could also give two shits who your party nominates for the record.

But if you think this will mean this will be good for the COUNTRY, I got a bridge to sell you. It's down by the bay. And you are not unlike the Bush people defending Bush after the WMDs... it wasn't good for the country back then either.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
137. Nope sounds like I have been reading
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:48 PM
Mar 2016

News abroad, see Spiegel has run interesting stories as well as Foreign policy and other high level media and talked to sources with a clue.

Also it sounds I am not a partisan. This is like the early 2000s now with hard core democrats

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
127. no, he didn't
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:27 PM
Mar 2016

He said he didn't want to be talking about it. And he said that months ago, before we know what we know now.

Dem2

(8,168 posts)
99. Anything to terminate Hillary's campaign
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 05:48 PM
Mar 2016

That's why they use extreme examples that people associate with death.

They need to think she's the equivalent of a killer and thus her campaign must be "terminated".

It's a last gasp effort.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
110. Some of us are talking of nothing serious
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:45 PM
Mar 2016

just National Security.

As to people hurt, yes, there are suspicions that HUMMINT assets have paid the ultimate price. So when you say none was hurt, you are actually wrong.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
120. "Suspicions" -- LMAO, from whom? Even Sanders said the email issue is BS. Saw him right there on TV
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:09 PM
Mar 2016
 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
121. the idiots at NSA, and at least a couple of the the Inspector Generals
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:10 PM
Mar 2016

this has butkis to do with Sanders at this point, So save yourself that talking point, You just look silly, and I mean it.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
123. We'll know soon enough. Of course, when she is not indicted or anything else, you will rack it up
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:15 PM
Mar 2016

to a conspiracy by the Oligarchs to protect Clinton. It's all you've got.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
126. Given they extended this from December, when it was supposed to be done
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:19 PM
Mar 2016

to May... and that they gave immunity to Pagliano, this does not look good. As I told you above. I care two shits who your party nominates. I really don't care. So save that talking point.

 

insta8er

(960 posts)
125. LOL :)
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:18 PM
Mar 2016

Reminds me of the ...When did you stop beating your wife question, anyway you answer it...you are toast..

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
111. I know you are kidding
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:47 PM
Mar 2016

but given the number of agents from the FBI, that one was one they had to discount. I suspect that was discounted within ten minutes of the investigation starting, but that is actually a question they ask whenever investigations of this sort are started. Maybe it took them 15, but only due to the volume.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
4. To keep the All-Powerful DU too busy arguing among ourselves to avoid the oncoming Fascist takeover.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:58 AM
Mar 2016

She's a conniver, that one.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.
[/center][/font][hr]

Ferd Berfel

(3,687 posts)
5. Didin't want anyone watching the deals she was
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:59 AM
Mar 2016

making for the Clinton Foundation while SoS?

just askin

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
11. I vote for this
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:11 AM
Mar 2016

And she was planning a presidential run- having everything off the books would have been a top priority so she could be free to take whatever stance she wanted at any particular time.

karynnj

(59,625 posts)
19. If so, it backfired spectacularly becoming a story on its own
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:20 AM
Mar 2016

At this point, every email she designated as work related has been made public, except for a few too secret. Consider that very few would EVER have been made public due to FOIA if they were always on the SD system. Nothing in them has risen to level of the story of setting up this unique private sever on which she wrote SD emails.

Note that it might have been possible had there been no controversy in her whole term that the system would never have been known. The reason it became known was they found very few emails meeting the Congressional inquiries and FOIA queries.


It seems like it took almost a year after HRC left for the SD FOIA people to realize and tell higher level people in the SD that they were missing HRC's emails. This sounds like a long time, but remember that HRC in first speaking of the server still was saying email was being captured by State.gov because she sent it to state.gov accounts. (Note that you don't have to be a genius to consider that had she actually created a state.gov account, she could have copied all her emails to that account - meaning the SD would have had a full record of everything she wrote (though obviously, unless all who were given her email were told to allow send to the SD account, the mail to her would not all be captured) In fact, she should have given the SD the email when she left -- not two years later.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
33. The Clintons practically live the mantra of "It seemed like a good idea at the time..."
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:28 AM
Mar 2016

Look at the Trump problem. Bill encouraged him to run, probably to sow chaos on the GOP side and take out Jeb and others.

As usual, it got a little out of hand.

 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
61. There it is, right there!
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:47 PM
Mar 2016

All this babble about "security" amounts to nothing. The real abuse consists of using her position to promote her own interests, the foundation, special favors for her contributors, etc. Of course, most people don't see it as abuse because we're numb to it.

gwheezie

(3,580 posts)
82. That doesn't make sense
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:11 PM
Mar 2016

If that was her purpose she would have used the government server for SOS business and had her private system set up for other business.

 

tk2kewl

(18,133 posts)
13. Probably on the advice of Kissenger
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:14 AM
Mar 2016

Apr 7, 2013 - WikiLeaks' Carter Cables II comprise 500,577 US diplomatic cables and other diplomatic communications ..... "The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.

Dustlawyer

(10,504 posts)
51. FOIA Requests, and yes, I agree that this was the main reason.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:09 PM
Mar 2016

She doesn't want us to know her real plans, her connections, benefactors, and shady shite! I believe the she wiped her servers with more than a cloth. There is no legitimate reason why she shouldn't use the government's server for her work, and private email for personal.

Response to mmonk (Original post)

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
37. Seems to me that replies 5, 6 and 9 aren't mutually exclusive
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:32 AM
Mar 2016

and as hypotheses go, such a constellation is the sort of possibility that requires an expensive investigation to dismiss for lack of evidence.

What a waste.

speaktruthtopower

(800 posts)
10. Maybe
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:05 AM
Mar 2016

to some extent she was worried about permanent government people sympathetic to her political enemies reading her communications.

In any event it was bad judgment to use an unsecured system to send and received secret material, marked or not.

karynnj

(59,625 posts)
14. Just as Bill answered in 2004 about Lewinsky when he did book tours, "because she could"
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:15 AM
Mar 2016

Many have said she wanted a blackberry because that was what she was used to -- and specifically she did not want a laptop or a desk computer. Reasonable, IF IT WERE APPROVED. As SoS, there were likely hundreds of things she needed to get up to speed on. Spending time on technology might not have been a good use of her time.

However, as soon as she was given a definitive "NO", she should have worked with the NSA and tech people. Using a laptop or desk top in her office would not have been difficult. She did not have to set it up herself and she had a tech staff if things did not work. However, if seems as though she refused to take that "no" as an answer.

Why? That is where I get to "because she could". Nominating HRC as SoS, gave Obama a SoS that he could send to allied countries and it would be almost a Presidential visit given her own status as a former First Lady and her popularity and name recognition. He also got a person who has always been described as smart, organized and focused. He also tied the Clintons to him - making his interests compatible with theirs - meaning that the most likely center of Democratic opposition was stilled.

But, the cost was that he absolutely could not ask her to step down over anything. He likely did not know the full extent of the system she was using. Considering everything the President has to worry about, whether the SoS has set up her own computer network and was using it for State Department business, was likely not high on the list. Even if the issue was pushed up to him, ie in 2010, what could he do without imperiling his own Presidency and his reelection?

To me, this action and using Blumenthal, when she was told she couldn't, bespeak a level of arrogance that makes me worry that if elected, we can expect 4 years of completely avoidable investigations.

GreydeeThos

(958 posts)
15. Why are Democrats propagating a Republican invented scandal against a Democrat?
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:17 AM
Mar 2016

What is the purpose of using a scandal cooked up entirely by Republicans on a board dedicated to Democrats?

One can only wonder why right wing talking points appear in discussions by Democrats, about Democrats.

GreydeeThos

(958 posts)
29. The origin of the email controversy is the Republicans in the House of Representatives
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:27 AM
Mar 2016

Just because the FBI gets drawn into a Republican meme does not mean that there is any substance to it.

There was nothing when Powell did it, and there was nothing when Rice did it and there is nothing there now.

 

Human101948

(3,457 posts)
36. No, the origin of the controversy is HIllary Clinton...
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:31 AM
Mar 2016

It was a completely unnecesssary and avoidable "scandal."

frylock

(34,825 posts)
63. And the origin of discovering the stained blue dress was Hillary's desire to withhold information.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:07 PM
Mar 2016

Are you beginning to see a common theme here?

frylock

(34,825 posts)
74. If Hillary had just compliied with the request for those law firm papers..
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:52 PM
Mar 2016

we would have never heard of the stained blue dress. If Hillary hadn't tried to circumvent FOIA requests, we would have never heard of the private mail server.

GreydeeThos

(958 posts)
76. Yea, the dress was a hit job on Bill Clinton
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:57 PM
Mar 2016

Just like this email deal is a hit job on Hillary Clinton.

There is a definite common theme here.

GreydeeThos

(958 posts)
79. Let's see
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:02 PM
Mar 2016

You have stretched the subject to include the dress.

You have stretched the subject to include Bill Clinton.

You are moving the subject to the VRWC.

You can continue until you find some point in the minutia to declare victory.

Enjoy your victory now because Bernie will not beat Hillary to the nomination.

Have a nice day.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
87. The common denominator is Hillary and her inability to comply with simple requests.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:24 PM
Mar 2016

The Clintons bring this shit on themselves, and then the rubes fall for their perpetual victimhood schtik.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
60. RW propaganda is not reality.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:40 PM
Mar 2016

The inadequacies of the State Dept email system go back decades. Albright, Powell, & Rice had to deal with the same issues. The only difference is that Clinton actually did something to make the email system she was left with workable for her.

But the only SoS emails that we hear about is Clinton's. Why is that? Why is there no Congressional dog-and-pony show investigating the Bush Regime? Why don't we have a similar level of outrage about Powell's emails leading up to 9-11? Or about Rice's emails about the invasion of Iraq?

It couldn't be because you don't believe there were no crimes committed then, is it? But then, you're happy to allow the RW propaganda machine to lead you around by the nose.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
80. Whooossshhh..
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:09 PM
Mar 2016

They did not have private SERVERS, and hackable ones, at that.

Yes, they used their personal email from time to time, but that is not the same thing as setting up a server in their homes and using it exclusively.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
134. "Whooossshhh" indeed.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:16 PM
Mar 2016

Still no answer as to why Clinton inadvertently sending classified emails is the bombshell that will get her indicted & sent to prison - in spite of the fact that she's not the target of any investigation of any agency at any level - but Powell & Rice doing the exact same thing for the exact same reasons doesn't even rise a level of being acknowledged by the RW propaganda machine.

Because what's driving this story is the RW propaganda machine. That this dead horse is still being flogged by Berniestas speaks volumes.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
139. You're promoting a RW agenda insisting that Clinton conform to a standard of conduct
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:21 PM
Mar 2016

that is literally applied to no one else on the planet.

And you don't even begin to try and justify it.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
143. Where are the transcripts of Powell being grilled by a Congressional committee for 11 hours?
Mon Mar 21, 2016, 06:51 AM
Mar 2016

Where were the endlessly repeated demands for Trumps emails for the multiple lawsuits against him, or Christies for the bridge closing, or the outrage for Jeb for the destruction of his email server after he left the Governor's office?

They don't exist. The RW propaganda machine has deemed that only Clinton should be subject to such close scrutiny. And you're more than happy to follow their orders.

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
84. Nope. Republican witch hunts may have poisoned the well...
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:16 PM
Mar 2016

... but these are real scandals. The inventor of the email scandal is Hillary Clinton's obsessive secrecy and aversion to transparency. In fairness to Secretary Clinton, the inventor of the Benghazi scandal is probably the CIA. But the State Dept. under Clinton made things much worse.

Fuddnik

(8,846 posts)
22. So no incriminating public records are left.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:24 AM
Mar 2016

The Bush Administration did this quite well, conducting under the radar, and possibly illegal behavior on personal laptops and e-mail.

What was she hoping to hide? What was in the 30,000 deleted e-mails?

 

AgerolanAmerican

(1,000 posts)
103. the nightmare scenario
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:02 PM
Mar 2016

What disturbs me the most is that there really is no solid foundation for ruling out the possibility that she was selling state secrets and getting paid through the Clinton Foundation. A server compromised in a known way as a means of providing access would be an effective method of creating plausible deniability.

Whatever it is, there's something that is seen as heavy enough to grant the server admin immunity to talk about. I just don't see that happening absent a substantial crime.

KeepItReal

(7,769 posts)
25. Initially, because the NSA said she could not have a secure Blackberry like POTUS
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:25 AM
Mar 2016

That's one reason. Why the NSA said no is not clear...maybe because she travels overseas too much and the cellular networks she'd roam on could be compromised.

I also have to blame POTUS and/or Rahm as Chief of Staff for not reigning in her use of personal email when it first arose.

Either way, it was a bad decision.





Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
81. You would allow hackers to get into your private server and view national secrets?
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:11 PM
Mar 2016

Nice to know.

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
96. In case you were not aware, there are ways to block hackers.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 05:20 PM
Mar 2016

Apparently Hillary's IT guy set it up securely since the logs appear to show the server was not hacked.


 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
86. Well then, that settles it. LOL
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:21 PM
Mar 2016

Not. As IT professionals, who are not generally considered ignorant and blind, have put it, a Non-HRC person could/would be in jail. I'm assuming you are not one of them.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
32. She could always have a Blackberry. Rice had a blackberry. She was always allowed
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:28 AM
Mar 2016

to have a Blackberry. The way people are getting the Blackberry angle 180 degrees wrong is kind of exasperating.

karynnj

(59,625 posts)
44. Did you ever move from one job to another that meant you needed to change your technology?
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:44 AM
Mar 2016

The fact is she was told she could NOT use a blackberry - so, no, she was not always allowed to do so for work. (Obviously, if she wanted a blackberry for personal calls, no one would have cared.)

Not to mention, if that was the SOLE reason -- and it is pretty lame, she could have insured that the SD had all her email. Imagine, she, first, had her tech person set up TWO accounts for her on her server - one for work, one for business. Then had the tech person, move all her incoming and outgoing email to a State.Gov account - say at the end of every week or month.

That would have assured that the FOIA requests and the Congressional inquiries had everything they needed. Had that happened, there likely never would have been any public knowledge that she did this. Rules could be written to assure that no one else did the same - though this is such a strange thing to do that I doubt any future SoS would have thought to do so.

I resent what she did because her selfish action could ultimately cast shadows on the reputations of Obama and Kerry, both better people than the Clintons.

 

Trust Buster

(7,299 posts)
35. Because our government was/is unprepared for the digital revolution.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:31 AM
Mar 2016

Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:44 PM - Edit history (1)

Powell and Rice also had problems with the archaic computer system at State. Our government servers get hacked on a daily basis. You can blame Hillary solely for political reasons but, it's pretty apparent that are government is still not prepared for this digital age.

karynnj

(59,625 posts)
46. However, shouldn't her response have been to demand more changes in the SD system?
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:49 AM
Mar 2016

Powell is credited with greatly improving the computer system. Clinton just left the system -- and did not bother to insure that teh SD got the emails that they should have always had in a reasonably timely way. Had she given the SD, her incoming and outgoing work email - say on a monthly basis, she would STILL be using her server, but there would have been no problem in getting the info for FOIA requests.

In doing what she did, she herself stonewalled the Congress and others and made it impossible for the SD to be as forthcoming as they might have wanted when she was gone -- they did not have the information.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
47. The email bullshit is nothing but political. It's RW propaganda designed solely to attack a Democrat
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:54 AM
Mar 2016

The fact that it's been taken up so readily by Sanders supporters speaks volumes.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,808 posts)
59. There is saying that includes a sex act and a chicken...
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:35 PM
Mar 2016

There is saying for this thread that includes a sex act and a chicken but I won't repeat it in this forum because it's vulgar and alertable.

If anybody wants to know the saying they can send me a private message.


PEACE
DSB

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
85. "Our government servers get hacked on a regular basis."
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:20 PM
Mar 2016

Yes - but only those with outward-facing servers.

Servers like SIPRnet and JWICS do NOT face out. You cannot email from them. They are insular and very protected. And they are NOT hacked. You know what's kept there? National security secrets. The OPM's server, for example, doesn't house national security secrets. It's sad that the employees had their information stolen, but the information the hackers garnered doesn't put the nation at risk.

You know what's been found on Hillary's server? Emails containing information that had been physically copied (typed up) from SIPRnet and sent, unencrypted, to Hillary on a server that didn't even use a dual authentication VPN and could be pinged directly from the Internet.

Sorry, but the "the government is hacked all the time" meme needs to die. Our government does not keep the nation's secrets on servers that can be hacked with the exception of, well, Hillary Clinton.

FlatBaroque

(3,160 posts)
38. Because when you are preparing for a global crime spree
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:34 AM
Mar 2016

the last thing you want is some pesky oversight.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
108. ^^^ LOL! True.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:36 PM
Mar 2016

Which is why, as soon as she left the office of SoS, they made having a private server for govt business illegal.

Prior to her, no one ever imagined someone would do such a thing.

But then, no one prior to her was accepting million$ from people they were granting favors for as SoS & had such things to hide. Too bad she didn't seem to care about putting the US in danger in the process, with such a lousy system that an unemployed painter in Eastern Europe could hack into it via Blumenthal.

A guy Obama didn't even know she was getting intel from. Jeezus, people are being so gullible about her. It would be easier to believe the made for TV version, but that is so far from reality.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
39. Apparently, the road to the Presidency is paved with "He/She did it first!"
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:35 AM
Mar 2016

The elites don't care about anything but keeping up with the other elites.

Whatever wrong a fellow elite gets away with becomes a "precedent" other elites aspire to and something elite sycophants readily excuse like a puppy excuses being beaten if you toss it some kind of meaningless treat.

Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #39)

 

w4rma

(31,700 posts)
56. The server was set up so that FoIA requests would return the answer, 'We have no records'.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:18 PM
Mar 2016

This server was set up to do exactly what it accomplished. It was designed so that no records would exist at the State Department, so that when Freedom of Information Act requests were filed there, the answer would be 'We have no records'.

 

pdsimdars

(6,007 posts)
69. Because she and people like her, thin they are above the rules that apply to everyone else.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:50 PM
Mar 2016

They think they are special.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
72. I can answer this. It was to be able to make business deals with and for wealthy private interests
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:07 PM
Mar 2016

outside the boundaries of her license, duties, and responsibilities of her position as SOS, and outside the scrutiny approved state channels and systems.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
105. concise and pertinent.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:24 PM
Mar 2016

Also outside the view of POTUS.

I cannot understand why the NSA (who had to see her extra-lawful communications) did not inform POTUS. Or perhaps they did, and he is playing a dimensional chess game on her. She dissed him and betrayed him (and is now hugging him) and that makes me maddest of all.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
89. Paganini was not offered immunity for a day in the park. He was her IT guy.
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:34 PM
Mar 2016

There are three others, Huma Abedin being one, who could take a hard fall for this. No one is dumb here. They were pre-meditated get arounds, and as they now begin to lead into the Foundation, and Slick Willy returns to "fundraise", well, the Democrats may live in The River of Denial aka Benghazi-farce, but the Republicans are waiting in the Gotcha mode.

We nominate her at our peril. Bill's no longer the brightest bulb. All of Trump's baggage is pretty much out there and he skips right over it. Her past baggage, as well. This is far newer, pay to play, enormous wealth and the FBI is not the vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Response to mmonk (Original post)

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
95. Not quite unplaced paranoia with the RW
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 05:19 PM
Mar 2016

the problem is that this was a self inflicted wound. And that is just the most obvious answer... there are a panoply of others.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
107. hey, the wealth of the world is at stake here
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:28 PM
Mar 2016

Untold riches await the Clintons. The military power to depose any world leader and re-shape the whole of the world. Rivers of gold flowing into the pockets of cronies. Wealth without measure.

Worth fighting for, if you're a Clinton.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
112. I am not willing to go down that road
Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:51 PM
Mar 2016

I do not believe she is the source of all evil, or Sauron... this was set to avoid the kind of 1990s witch hunt, and well. self inflicted would... if or rather when this explodes though, the only ones to suffer will be the country. The party will as well, but that is truly incidental to me. This scandal may very well give the presidency to Trump.

History will not be kind to the Clintons tough.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»So why did SoS Clinton ha...